![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
What a second? Maurice Greenberg is 78 years old as of 2004. If that is correct, he couldn't have founded Coleco in 1932 at age 6! Previous unsignedcomment dated 02:33, 19 December 2005
If there's a Maurice Greenberg born in '1926, it wasn't the founder of Coleco. What data do you have? Coleco was definitely founded by a guy named Greenberg, whose two sons took over the business. We called them Lenny & Squiggy. They had a very high opinion of their ability which was not necessarily borne out b event. One of the problems we had was immense overhead from building an HQ during the fat days of Cabbage Patch that became a huge burden when the craze fell back to normal levels; another was a tendancy to go for sales rather than profit. It was really fun in the short run, not so much fun in the long run. rewinn 06:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)?
I wonder if this section can be expanded a little bit. I'm curious how a company can be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy in 1984, when in 1983 they introduced one of the most successful toy lines ever (the Cabbage Patch Dolls) -- 68.47.81.141 08:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Although there's no need to delve into the minutiae of Coleco's product lines, the article does fail to address ventures such as the acquisition of Scrabble for a brief period of time. I don't know enough myself to state whether this was an oddity, or that Coleco made a more extended attempt to diversify into board games, etc. D. Brodale ( talk) 11:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
If this isn't cited to published literary/cultural analysis by December 4, it goes. There is nothing that requires uncited material to sit indefinitely and Jimbo has said that he prefers it to be removed. WillOakland ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
FYI I'm not impressed by your ability to link to policy pages, and in my experience that's usually a sign of someone who's here to start drama rather than write respectable encyclopedia articles. WillOakland ( talk) 22:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
User:WillOakland: I would strongly recommend that you assume a little good faith here and keep your discussion civil. I found out about this discussion from WT:VG and am rather put off by what I'm seeing here. Your statements do not seem to reflect community consensus on the matter (WikiProjects have adopted their own guidelines based on Wikipedia policies, but you seem to be ignoring them), and the tone of your end of this discussion is bordering on both article ownership and tendentious editing. If you feel strongly that popular-culture information should be outright deleted, I would recommend you join or start a broader discussion on this topic as a whole at the WikiProject Talk page, as this has much farther-reaching implications than just for this article. If you have any questions, feel free to respond either here, on WT:VG, or on my Talk page. Thank you. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 01:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Let me say this more directly, Will: I do not accept this notion that you are the sole voice of what stays and what goes on Wikipedia. One of WP's core policies is the consensus policy, and we had already arrived at a consensus of what constituted acceptable pop-culture information in a genre that has a lot of pop-culture in it. For you to say that you don't accept anything that deviates from the strictest letter of a core policy, even when that policy allows for exceptions and for WikiProjects to adopt their own standards that are in keeping with those policies, is for you to reject community consensus. And when you do that, you're making a public statement that you do not intend to follow policy when working on this project. That is bound to get you in trouble sooner or later, whether it be edit warring, personal attacks, tendentious editing, or what have you.
Please don't reject literally months or even years of constructive consensus work just because your personal view is stricter than most. That's not how things work here. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 05:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
This discussion seems to have died off rather suddenly. Are there any more opinions on this matter, or are we ready to call a consensus? — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 01:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Ok, per this discussion (which I'm assuming by now is consensus), I removed the section from here and reworked the material as references at ColecoVision. There is now a section there entitled "Legacy and pop culture influence". I was also able to flesh it out with more music references, and rework some of the legacy material already on that page - which now includes references and such. -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 21:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Coleco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Coleco was Pixelated, Merged and Acquired by Amazon Since 1996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6EF1:57D0:51D7:CA58:2C09:8A94 ( talk) 23:26, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
One of the things that has been infuriating me since looking online is an oddity. As a youth I owned a "Coleco Vision". But my Vision looks nothing like all the pictures and videos I found online. To the contrary after research I discovered a second device named the "Coleco Gemini" instead. The article is light on details so does anyone know what prompted creation of second console (according to article in same year even). Is this a regional thing? (Vision was USA model and for us in rest of world we get Gemini which is branded as Vision?) Confused to say the least and Gemini seems to have far fewer details online to help clarify. Kav2001c ( talk) 20:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)kav2001c
Should it get a mention on page? Doremon764 ( talk) 20:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Unless I missed it - There was no mention of the "Cabbaga Patch Kids" - - - another Phenomenon in itself
Amazing story (Coleco) 2001:569:52E5:3700:F8A5:3F16:CBA:7933 ( talk) 17:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
What a second? Maurice Greenberg is 78 years old as of 2004. If that is correct, he couldn't have founded Coleco in 1932 at age 6! Previous unsignedcomment dated 02:33, 19 December 2005
If there's a Maurice Greenberg born in '1926, it wasn't the founder of Coleco. What data do you have? Coleco was definitely founded by a guy named Greenberg, whose two sons took over the business. We called them Lenny & Squiggy. They had a very high opinion of their ability which was not necessarily borne out b event. One of the problems we had was immense overhead from building an HQ during the fat days of Cabbage Patch that became a huge burden when the craze fell back to normal levels; another was a tendancy to go for sales rather than profit. It was really fun in the short run, not so much fun in the long run. rewinn 06:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)?
I wonder if this section can be expanded a little bit. I'm curious how a company can be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy in 1984, when in 1983 they introduced one of the most successful toy lines ever (the Cabbage Patch Dolls) -- 68.47.81.141 08:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Although there's no need to delve into the minutiae of Coleco's product lines, the article does fail to address ventures such as the acquisition of Scrabble for a brief period of time. I don't know enough myself to state whether this was an oddity, or that Coleco made a more extended attempt to diversify into board games, etc. D. Brodale ( talk) 11:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
If this isn't cited to published literary/cultural analysis by December 4, it goes. There is nothing that requires uncited material to sit indefinitely and Jimbo has said that he prefers it to be removed. WillOakland ( talk) 22:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
FYI I'm not impressed by your ability to link to policy pages, and in my experience that's usually a sign of someone who's here to start drama rather than write respectable encyclopedia articles. WillOakland ( talk) 22:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
User:WillOakland: I would strongly recommend that you assume a little good faith here and keep your discussion civil. I found out about this discussion from WT:VG and am rather put off by what I'm seeing here. Your statements do not seem to reflect community consensus on the matter (WikiProjects have adopted their own guidelines based on Wikipedia policies, but you seem to be ignoring them), and the tone of your end of this discussion is bordering on both article ownership and tendentious editing. If you feel strongly that popular-culture information should be outright deleted, I would recommend you join or start a broader discussion on this topic as a whole at the WikiProject Talk page, as this has much farther-reaching implications than just for this article. If you have any questions, feel free to respond either here, on WT:VG, or on my Talk page. Thank you. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 01:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Let me say this more directly, Will: I do not accept this notion that you are the sole voice of what stays and what goes on Wikipedia. One of WP's core policies is the consensus policy, and we had already arrived at a consensus of what constituted acceptable pop-culture information in a genre that has a lot of pop-culture in it. For you to say that you don't accept anything that deviates from the strictest letter of a core policy, even when that policy allows for exceptions and for WikiProjects to adopt their own standards that are in keeping with those policies, is for you to reject community consensus. And when you do that, you're making a public statement that you do not intend to follow policy when working on this project. That is bound to get you in trouble sooner or later, whether it be edit warring, personal attacks, tendentious editing, or what have you.
Please don't reject literally months or even years of constructive consensus work just because your personal view is stricter than most. That's not how things work here. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 05:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
This discussion seems to have died off rather suddenly. Are there any more opinions on this matter, or are we ready to call a consensus? — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 01:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Ok, per this discussion (which I'm assuming by now is consensus), I removed the section from here and reworked the material as references at ColecoVision. There is now a section there entitled "Legacy and pop culture influence". I was also able to flesh it out with more music references, and rework some of the legacy material already on that page - which now includes references and such. -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 21:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Coleco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Coleco was Pixelated, Merged and Acquired by Amazon Since 1996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6EF1:57D0:51D7:CA58:2C09:8A94 ( talk) 23:26, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
One of the things that has been infuriating me since looking online is an oddity. As a youth I owned a "Coleco Vision". But my Vision looks nothing like all the pictures and videos I found online. To the contrary after research I discovered a second device named the "Coleco Gemini" instead. The article is light on details so does anyone know what prompted creation of second console (according to article in same year even). Is this a regional thing? (Vision was USA model and for us in rest of world we get Gemini which is branded as Vision?) Confused to say the least and Gemini seems to have far fewer details online to help clarify. Kav2001c ( talk) 20:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)kav2001c
Should it get a mention on page? Doremon764 ( talk) 20:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Unless I missed it - There was no mention of the "Cabbaga Patch Kids" - - - another Phenomenon in itself
Amazing story (Coleco) 2001:569:52E5:3700:F8A5:3F16:CBA:7933 ( talk) 17:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)